predicate-crime
9 cases — ← All topics
| Case | Title | Lower Court | Docketed | Status | Flags | Tags | Question Presented |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 25A21 | Deago Lee Eddings v. United States | Third Circuit | 2025-07-08 | Presumed Complete | disarmament firearm-possession historical-tradition predicate-crime second-amendment supervised-release | Whether the Second Amendment precludes disarming individuals on supervised release or state parole under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) based on historical tra… | |
| 23-5194 | Andra Green v. United States | Fourth Circuit | 2023-07-25 | Denied | Response WaivedIFP | criminal-law criminal-statute due-process firearm-offense firearms hobbs-act predicate-crime sentencing sentencing-enhancement statutory-interpretation violent-crime | Whether Hobbs Act robbery qualifies as a crime of violence under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) |
| 21-8199 | Yuri Chachanko, et al. v. United States | Ninth Circuit | 2022-06-22 | Denied | Response RequestedResponse WaivedRelisted (2)IFP | 18-usc-924 aiding-and-abetting crime-of-violence criminal-law hobbs-act hobbs-act-robbery predicate-crime predicate-offense sentencing-enhancement statutory-interpretation vacatur | Whether the Defendants' convictions for violating 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A) must be vacated because Hobbs Act robbery based on an aiding and abetting t… |
| 20-256 | Zavian Munize Jordan v. United States | Fourth Circuit | 2020-09-01 | Denied | Amici (2) | 18-usc-924c circuit-split criminal-procedure criminal-statute drug-trafficking firearm-possession predicate-crime statutory-interpretation violent-crime | Whether separate convictions under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1) require separate predicate crimes and separate acts of using, carrying, or possessing a firea… |
| 19-7757 | Babatunde Popoola v. United States | Fourth Circuit | 2020-02-24 | Denied | Response WaivedIFP | bank-fraud consent criminal-law criminal-procedure financial-crimes identity-theft money-laundering predicate-crime statutory-interpretation | Whether a person who with the consent of a bank account holder provides identifying information to a third party to deposit funds into the account whe… |
| 19-6238 | Brannon D. Taylor v. United States | Eighth Circuit | 2019-10-10 | Denied | Response WaivedIFP | 18-usc-924 18-usc-924(c)(3)(A) 18-USC-924c categorical-approach contemporary-interpretation crime-of-violence elements-clause predicate-crime statutory-interpretation | Whether courts must analyze the least of the acts historically criminalized under the predicate crime or a contemporary interpretation suffices to sat… |
| 18-7920 | Harold A. Habeck, II v. United States | Fourth Circuit | 2019-02-12 | Denied | Response WaivedIFP | consecutive-sentences criminal-procedure criminal-procedure,sentencing,mandatory-minimums,d criminal-sentencing discretion drug-offense drug-offenses firearms mandatory-minimum mandatory-minimums predicate-crime sentencing-discretion statutory-interpretation | Whether the district court has discretion to consider less than the mandatory sixty month consecutive sentence for a predicate drug offense under 21 U… |
| 18-7726 | Carlton Williams v. United States | Third Circuit | 2019-02-01 | Denied | Response WaivedIFP | career-offender categorical-approach criminal-law federal-criminal-law pattern-of-racketeering predicate-crime racketeering racketeering-activity rico rico-conviction sentencing sentencing-guidelines | Is a sentencing court limited to applying a categorical approach when determining whether a conviction for violating the Federal Racketeer Influence a… |
| 18-5658 | Tracey L. Brown v. United States | Ninth Circuit | 2018-08-20 | Denied | Response WaivedIFP | career-offender commerce commerce-clause-jurisdiction,interstate-commerce,d criminal-procedure Did the Ninth Circuit err by finding that the pret Did the Ninth Circuit err when it sentenced Mr. Br due-process due-process,pretrial-identification,suggestive-ide predicate-crime sentencing sentencing,career-offender,predicate-offense,viole | Did the Ninth Circuit err by finding sufficient evidence for interstate commerce when the underlying acts did not have a de minimus effect? |